doi: 10.1515/stap-2015-0001
THE DIALECTAL PROVENANCE OF LONDON, WELLCOME LIBRARY, MS 5262
LAURA ESTEBAN-SEGURA
University of Murcia
ABSTRACT
This paper takes into consideration the language found in London, Wellcome Library, MS 5262, a one-volume codex from the early fifteenth century which holds a medical recipe collection. The manuscript, written in Middle English (and with a few fragments in Latin), represents a fine exemplar of a remedybook, a type of writing that has been traditionally considered to be popular. The main aim is to study the dialect of the text contained in folios 3v-61v in order to localise it geographically.
The methodology followed for the purpose is grounded on the model supplied by the
Linguis-tic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English (LALME) (McIntosh et al. 1986), which consists of several
stages including the completion of a survey questionnaire, the creation of the linguistic profile of the text and the application of the ‘fit’-technique (McIntosh et al. 1986, vol. 1: 10-12; Benskin 1991). Extralinguistic features of the manuscript may also be taken into consideration. This com-prehensive analysis will help us to circumscribe the dialectal provenance and/or local origin of the text accurately.
Keywords: dialect, provenance, Middle English, MS Wellcome 5262, LALME
1. Introduction
The field of English historical – particularly mediaeval – dialectology has re-ceived increased attention from scholars during the last decades with a wealth of both general and specific studies (Laing 1989b; Riddy 1991; Laing & Wil-liamson 1994; Dossena & Lass 2004).1 This paper is concerned with the dialect
1 The present research has been funded by the Autonomous Government of Andalusia (grant
num-of the text in the late Middle English manuscript Wellcome 5262 (hereafter referred to as W5262), housed in London’s Wellcome Library. The “usefulness, and indeed necessity, in mediaeval studies of examining each scribal text sepa-rately as a valuable source in its own right” has been claimed elsewhere (Laing 1989b: 150), as well as the importance of micro approaches focusing on indi-vidual texts to complement large-scale analyses (Stenroos 2004: 283). Thus, the main objective is to carry out an exploratory analysis of a number of linguistic features, which are represented by specific forms or occurrences of words, of the language found in W5262 in order to localise the text geographically. Extra-linguistic features of the manuscript may also be taken into account since they can provide clues to further help with the dialectal circumscription of the text.
The paper is organised as follows: an introduction to the text under study is presented in this first section; then, the methodology is explained, and the anal-ysis and results discussed; the findings drawn from the investigation are com-mented upon in the conclusions. Finally, the references and appendices are sup-plied.
W5262 is a one-volume codex containing a collection of medical recipes
which dates from the first quarter of the fifteenth century. It can be classified within the type of medical writing known as remedybooks. As Voigts & McVaugh (1984: 21) have remarked, remedybooks were “made up mostly of treatment for ailments – or, more accurately, for symptoms – by minor surgical procedures, non-theoretical phlebotomy, cupping, dietary, prayers, charms, ritual action, and, of course, “prescriptions””. They have been traditionally con-sidered to belong to a popular tradition of medical writing, hence standing in opposition to academic medicine. Nevertheless, recipes were not restricted to this type of books and could be found within specialised medical treatises (for instance, those occurring in the Middle English Gilbertus Anglicus (cf. Esteban-Segura 2012a)). Other remedybooks are A fifteenth-century leechbook (London, Medical Society, MS 136),2 edited by Dawson (1934), and the Liber de diversis
medicinis (Lincoln, Cathedral Library, MS A.5.2.), edited by Ogden (1938).
The contents of W5262 include: a) coloured illustrations of a religious nature (representing mainly saints), which have been partially obliterated (ff. 1r-3r); b) a list of contents (ff. 3v-7v); c) 133 recipes, mainly therapeutic, but also prognostic, cosmetic (those pertaining to this type can hardly be called prescrip-tions), etc. (ff. 8r-61v); d) an added prayer in Latin to St Kenelm, patron saint of Winchcombe Abbey, a now-vanished Benedictine abbey in Gloucestershire (f. 61v). The recipes are in English and there are some fragments in Latin as well. The text is a compilation of extracts from different sources, although
ber FFI2011-26492). These grants are hereby gratefully acknowledged.
2
lected recipes might have been copied from another composite text; in any case, the Middle English version is a translation from Latin. The value of translated texts has long been acknowledged for English historical dialectology (McIntosh et al. 1986: 4; Laing 1989a: ix-x) and dialectal studies focusing on Middle Eng-lish versions and/or translations of medical texts from Latin have been recently carried out (Marqués-Aguado 2009; Esteban-Segura 2010, 2012b).
Finally, it should be noted that the manuscript under consideration is unique not only for linguistic or content investigation, but also for the insights that it can provide into socio-historical aspects, as well as for its coloured drawings, rubricated initials and extravagantly decorated catchwords.3 In fact, W5262 was “item of the month” in February 2010 at the Wellcome Library as “a rare sur-viving devotional recipe manuscript” combining “folk remedies with religious iconography and a royal heritage to boot”.4
2. Methodology
The methodological approach follows the model offered in the Linguistic Atlas of
Late Mediaeval English (McIntosh et al. 1986), LALME for short, in which a
number of steps needs to be completed. In a previous stage, the text had been transcribed from the digitised images of the manuscript,5 making every effort to produce a diplomatic transcript that would render W5262 a proper historical wit-ness and an acceptable source of data for (historical) linguistic research. This involved the avoidance of any emendation, any modernisation (which in accor-dance meant keeping the symbols for thorn and yogh, and both the original capi-talisation and punctuation practice), any alteration of scribal word division or separation, and finally, any form of regularisation.6 Returning to LALME and its procedure, the first step entails filling in a survey questionnaire, which consists of items and their different forms of realisation. A set of items was selected from the comprehensive list supplied in volume 3 of LALME (pp. xviii-xix) in order to devise the linguistic profile (LP henceforward) of the text. They mostly com-prised function words, although some content words and inflections have also been included. As well as having been transcribed, W5262 had been previously lemmatised and morphologically tagged, as part of the work done for several research projects based at the University of Málaga (Spain) in which the author
3
For further details about the manuscript, see Esteban-Segura (2013).
4
http://blog.wellcomelibrary.org/2010/02/quick-fixes-saints-and-symbolism-a-rare- surviving-devotional-recipe-manuscript-from-the-early-15th-century-item-of-the-month-february-2010/ (Last accessed 15 March, 2013).
5
The text remains unedited to date; its edition is currently in preparation.
6 In this respect, see Lass (2004: 22), who advocates the “maintenance of forensic cleanliness
collaborates.7 The lemmatisation and morphological tagging of the text eased considerably the retrieval of all the occurrences (or forms) of items, which were promptly obtained. The software tool Text Search Engine (Miranda-García & Garrido-Garrido 2012) was used for the purpose. With regard to the arrangement of results, LALME’s bracketing system (see vol. 3: xiv) has been modified. Thus, all the corresponding forms of each item are supplied with the number of occur-rences in decreasing order of frequency. The completed questionnaire has allowed devising the LP of W5262, which is available in Appendix I.
In the next stage, the ‘fit’-technique (McIntosh et al. 1986, vol. 1: 10-12; Benskin 1991) was applied. This technique encompasses in turn different phas-es, in which dot maps, item maps, LPs of other texts and the county dictionary may be employed and/or consulted. Firstly, dot maps (vol. 1) are used to plot forms so as to delimit an approximate geographical area of origin; then, item maps (vol. 2) are assessed for closer dialectal localisation, as they present in more detail subareas in which specific variants are registered. The final stage in the dialectal localisation is to collate the LP obtained with the LPs (vol. 3) for the surrounding survey points in order to find forms having close congeners in them and, therefore, to confirm and exactly pinpoint the area. The county dic-tionary (vol. 4) may also be consulted for recalcitrant variants or forms not ga-thered in maps.
Following these principles, well-attested forms from the LP of W5262 were selected and compared against the dot maps found in LALME’s volume 1. Then, to restrict the area of provenance and find the precise location of items’ variants, a set of them was chosen (those considered to have diagnostic value, inasmuch as their forms might contain distinctive features) and scrutinised against the corresponding item maps by means of an overlay of tracing paper in which do-minant and minor variants were recorded. Lastly, the LP was compared with other LPs contained in LALME.
3. Analysis
Once the features had been surveyed in the dot maps, the distribution of the (primary) variants for items8 ANY, MUCH, THOUGH, ADDER, together with the secondary variants (represented by those forms ending in <þ> for the plural) of
WILL and SHALL,9 restricted the geographical location of the text to the
7
The main aims are the production of digital editions and the compilation of the annotated
Málaga Corpus of Late Middle English Scientific Prose, which can be consulted at the web
page http://hunter.uma.es.
8
Items are rendered in small capitals and forms in single inverted commas, although they are not used for the forms in the appendices.
9
lands and South. Personal pronouns were of use for determining a more specific – although still broad – localisation; accordingly, the dominant forms of items for the nominative (THEY) and objective (THEM) case (‘þei’ and ‘hem’ respec-tively)10 of the third-person plural pronouns correspond to a mixed type (with a Scandinavian subject form and a native object form), which is distinctive of the Midlands (Mossé 1952: 55, 58). Moreover, the absence of prefixal marking for past participles (42 out of 124 instances of past-participle forms are prefixed, while the rest (80×) appear without a prefix) and the use of the prefix y- in past participles, which is found on 31 occasions, are also typical of the Midlands (Mossé 1952: 86).
The area in which the forms belonging to the items previously mentioned conflate the most and in which there is a greater concentration of them is the West Midlands. This specific localisation has been further corroborated by the primary forms for EACH (‘uche’ and ‘vche’), which are to be found almost ex-clusively in this region. Other items such as THE, IT, WAS, WOULD, FROM, THAN,
THERE or WHERE were of no account, given that the forms present in W5262 are widespread all over the country.
Several items from the LP were selected in order to record the occurrence of their forms (both dominant and minor variants) in LALME’s item maps and to further narrow down the area and establish a more specific geographical placing of the text. The first that will be mentioned is the item ARE,corresponding to the present indicative plural of the verb ‘to be’. All the forms recorded in the manu-script (‘beo’, ‘buþ’, ‘ben’, ‘beþ’, ‘beoþ’) can be found to the north of Hereford-shire (Hrf).11
Although the singular forms collected for WILL and SHALL are widespread and therefore irrelevant for precise localisation, the plural ones are revealing. Concerning the plural of the verb WILL, the ‘wol’ type forms ending in <þ> are typical of the West Midlands and all the forms occurring in the text (‘wolleþ’, ‘wolle’, ‘wollen’) can be found to the north of Herefordshire and to the north of Worcestershire (Wor). The same applies for the plural forms of SHALL ending in <þ>, which can be found bordering these two areas: in the north-western part of Worcestershire and north-eastern part of Herefordshire.
As for the plural of the noun EYE, the dominant spelling ‘eẏnen’ is found in the north-western part of Worcestershire, as well as the secondary variant ‘eẏen’; the variant ‘ẏȝen’, of which there is only one occurrence, is attested in nearby north-east Herefordshire. Both dominant and secondary forms of the item IF (‘ȝif’, ‘ȝef’, ‘if’, ‘ẏf’) are found in these counties.
regarded as minor or secondary variants.
10 These are the dominant or primary variants. 11
The distribution of the noun FIRE is similar but it also includes the southern parts of Shropshire (Sal) and Staffordshire (Stf). Forms of the item LITTLE can also be found in bordering Gloucestershire (Gl) and Warwickshire (Wrk).
Of all of these areas, Herefordshire and Worcestershire are the counties in which main and secondary variants of more items conflate. In this line, as Benskin (1991: 13) has pointed out, particular combinations or co-occurrences designate specific areas, which would stand for sectors in a continuum of re-gional dialect. This notion of a continuum also applies when considering the forms which are attested in several locations and are, consequently, shared.
In order to complete the last stage of the ‘fit’-technique, the LPs from Here-fordshire (vol. 3, pp. 161-175) and Worcestershire (vol. 3, pp. 550-564) were surveyed and contrasted with the LP of W5262. Those which display more simi-larities are LP 7460 (an early fifteenth-century manuscript including part of the New Testament), LP 7520 (a version of the Wycliffite New Testament), both from Herefordshire, and LP 7630 (a religious manuscript containing lives of saints), from Worcestershire.12
Concerning extralinguistic features, there are several sixteenth-century in-scriptions in W5262 which give insights on the history or provenance of the manuscript. One of these, on folio 12r, makes reference to a man named Henry Dyngley, who belonged to a family of devout Catholics and rural farmers work-ing as doctors and who was from Charlton, in Worcester. At the end of the ma-nuscript, on folio 61v, there is a reference to St Kenelm, an Anglo-Saxon saint venerated throughout mediaeval England who, according to legend, died in Worcestershire. The manuscript was in physical circulation (and used) in this area and hence a historical connection with it can also be ascertained.
4. Conclusions
In the present study, a dialectal analysis of a medical text in late Middle English has been carried out by means of the methodology postulated in LALME. On account of the results it should be pointed out that the number of general fea-tures found throughout the country indicates that the language of W5262 is fair-ly standardised. Nonetheless, the data obtained from linguistic profiling and dialectal fitting suggest that it was written in the Midland variety and could be circumscribed in the West Midlands.
The conflation of forms in the counties of Herefordshire and Worcestershire has made it possible to arrive at a more specific localisation, a bordering area between these two regions being an eligible place of origin for the text of the
12 These LPs are furnished in Appendix II (LP 7460), Appendix III (LP 7520) and Appendix
manuscript. The fact that the distribution of the forms in the LP of W5262 matches (although not in its entirety) those of three LPs from the above-mentioned counties can be grounded reason to assign the dialect to the proposed area. The texts could then be viewed as forming part of a continuum, in which some forms co-occur whereas others do not. Extralinguistic aspects of the book concerning provenance and content also corroborate the placing arrived at in this study.
In spite of this ascription, it might be possible to find different dialectal lay-ers in the text, since the scribe might have translated the language of the exem-plar into his own dialect. The influence of neighbouring areas may also be sig-nificant, as has become patent in the examination of the LP (cf. the idea of a dialect being an “assemblage of linguistic components” (Benskin 1991: 23)).
Future research will address the geographical dissemination of the work. Thus, further investigation on its transmission in order to firstly find out the number of extant copies containing it or parts of it, and/or material sharing the recipes, is mandatory. This can be a difficult task since, as Mäkinen (2004: 144) argues, medical recipes in the Middle Ages constitute a close-knit textual type with a small number of original texts in which intertextuality is unavoidable.
Secondly, analyses of the language of these copies, and more specifically, of their dialects will be pursued. This can shed light on the production and circula-tion of medical texts during the Middle Ages. Previous studies on other scientif-ic manuscripts and texts from the East Midlands have established the existence of an extensive output and wide diffusion of medical texts in that particular area during the mediaeval period (Jones 2000; cf. Esteban-Segura 2010, 2012b). It would be enlightening to detect whether there was a similar network in the West Midlands and, if such is the case, to assess the extent of it.
APPENDIX I
LP W5262
THE:þe (522×), the (1×), þo (1×), þ (1×) THESE:þeose (4×), þese (3×), þuse (1×) IT:hit (422×), it (54×), hẏt (3×), hit (1×) THEY:þei (9×), þeẏ (3×), þaẏ (1×), þey (1×)
THEM:hem (79×), hem (8×) SUCH:suche (1×)
EACH: uche (17×), vche (4×), eche (1×), uch (1×)
MANY:monẏ (2×)
ANY:enẏ (8×), anẏ (2×), ani (1×) MUCH:muche (52×)
ARE:beo (4×), buþ (4×), ben (3×), beþ (2×), beoþ (1×)
WERE:were (4×)
IS:is (69×), ẏs (11×), es (1×) WAS:was (6×)
SHALL sg.: schal (41×), schalt (6×), schat (1×); pl.: schul (4×), schulluþ (2×), schelen (1×), schullen (1×) SHOULD:schuld (1×)
WILL sg.: wol (21×), wel (1×), wilt (1×), wolt (1×); pl.: wolleþ (2×), wolle (1×), wollen (1×)
WOULD:woldest (1×) FROM:from (5×)
AFTER:aftur (12×), Aftur (1×) THAN:þan (1×)
THOUGH:þah (1×), þauȝ (1×), þauȝh (1×) IF:ȝif (45×), ȝef (4×), if (2×), ẏf (1×) AGAINST:a ȝeẏn (2×), a ȝein (1×), a ȝen (1×), aȝen (1×), aȝeẏn (1×)
AGAIN: aȝen (1×), aȝeyn (1×), aȝeẏn (1×)
THINK:þenke (1×)
THERE: þer (5×), þer (4×), Þer (1×), þere (1×)
WHERE:where (2×)
THROUGH:þorh (15×), þoruȝ (2×), þroh (2×), þourh (1×), þourȝ (1×)
WHEN:whanne (11×), when (7×), whan (5×), whanne (4×), whan (3×), whenne (2×),Whanne (1×), when (1×)
ADDER: neddur (2×), eddur (1×), neddere (1×), neddre (1×), neddur (1×) BOTH:boþe (2×)
EITHER:eẏþer (3×)
EYE pl.:eẏnen (27×), eẏen (2×), eynen (1×), eẏnen (1×), ẏȝen (1×)
FIRE: fuẏre (17×), fuẏr (3×), feẏre (1×) FIRST: furst (5×), frust (1×), furste (1×) FLESH: flesche (1×), fleshe (1×) GIVE:ȝif (17×), ȝeue (12×), ȝef (1×), ȝit (1×)
LITTLE:litul (5×), leẏtel (3×), litel (3×), luẏtel (3×), lẏtel (3×), leẏtul (2×), lẏtul (1×), lẏtẏl (1×)
LIVE:lẏue (2×), leue (1×) OWN:oune (5×) Past-participle prefix:13 ẏ- (31×), i- (10×), a- (1×) SOME:sum (2×) SORROW:sorewe (1×) YEAR:ȝer (1×)
13 It does not appear in the list of items
APPENDIX II
LP 7460 (LALME, vol. 3, p. 172)
THESE:þese (þes, þis, þuse) IT:it
THEY:þei THEM:hem
SUCH:suche, such ((syche)) MANY:many (mony) ((meny)) ANY:eny (any)
MUCH:muche (myche) ARE:beþ (ben) IS:is
WAS:wes
SHALL pl.:schuleþ, schulen (schulleþ) SHOULD sg.:schulde
WILL sg.:wole; pl.:wolleþ, woleþ WOULD sg.:wolde
FROM:from ((fro)) AFTER:aftur THAN:þan
THOUGH:þouȝ (þauȝ) IF:ȝef (ȝif)
AGAINST:aȝeyn (aȝeyns) AGAIN:aȝeyn
THINK:þenke WHERE:where
THROUGH: þoroȝ, þorowȝ, þorow (þorouȝ)
WHEN:whan, whenne, when (þo) BOTH:boþe
EITHER + OR:oþer + EYE pl.:yȝen, yen FIRE: fuyr FIRST: furst GIVE:ȝef (ȝaf) LITTLE:luytel, lytel LIVE:lyf-
OWN:owene, owne
APPENDIX III
LP 7520 (LALME, vol. 3, pp. 174-175)
THESE:þeose, þese (þis, þeos, þuse) IT:hit (it)
THEY:þay (þey) THEM:hem SUCH:suche EACH:uche (eche)
MANY:many, monye, mony ANY:any, ony
MUCH:muche, moche, meche ARE:beon, beoþ (ben)
IS:is WAS:was
SHALL sg.:schal; pl. schullen (schulleþ) SHOULD sg.:schulde (schul)
WILL sg.:wol; pl. wolen, woleþ (wolun) FROM:from, fro
AFTER:aftur THAN:þan
THOUGH:þagh (þogh, þaugȝ) IF:ȝyf
AGAINST:aȝaynes, aȝayn (aȝenus) AGAIN:aȝayn, aȝeyn
THINK:þenk- THERE:þer WHERE:wher
THROUGH:þorgh, þorȝh WHEN:whanne, whan (whenne) BOTH:boþe
EYE pl.:yen FIRE: fuyr FIRST: furst GIVE:ȝaf
LITTLE:luytul (litul) LIVE:lyue
OWN:oune
APPENDIX IV
LP 7630 (LALME, vol. 3, p. 553)
THESE:þeose, þeos IT:hit
THEY:þei, þey, heo, a THEM:hem
SUCH:suche, such EACH:vche, vch-
MANY:moni, mony (monye) ANY:eny
MUCH:muchel, muche ARE:beoþ, beþ, ben IS:is
WAS:was
SHALL sg.: schal; pl. schullen, schule, schul
SHOULD sg.:schulde
WILL sg.:wole, wol; pl. wollen, wolleþ WOULD sg.:wolde
FROM:from, fro AFTER:aftur
THAN:þen
THOUGH:þauh (þouh) ((þauȝ, þouȝ)) IF:ȝif
AGAINST:aȝeynes AGAIN:aȝein, aȝeyn THINK:þenke THERE:þer
WHERE:where, wher, wher-, whar- THROUGH:þorwh, þorw
WHEN:whon ((when, whonne)) BOTH:boþe
EITHER + OR:ouþur + EYE pl.:eȝen
FIRST: furste, furst GIVE:ȝaf
LITTLE:luytel, luyte, luttel, lutel LIVE:liu-, liue
REFERENCES
Benskin, Michael. 1991. The ‘fit’-technique explained. In Felicity Riddy (ed.), Regionalism in
late medieval manuscripts and texts: Essays celebrating the publication of A
linguis-tic atlas of late mediaeval English, 9-26. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.
Dawson, Warren R. (ed.). 1934. A leechbook or collection of medical recipes of the fifteenth
century. London: Macmillan.
Dossena, Marina & Roger Lass (eds.). 2004. Methods and data in English historical dialectology. Bern: Peter Lang.
Esteban-Segura, Laura. 2010. Dialectal study of a version of the Middle English Gilbertus Angli-cus: The case of G.U.L. MS Hunter 509 (ff. 14r-167v). English Studies. A Journal of
English Language and Literature 91(3): 256-273.
Esteban-Segura, Laura. 2012a. System of physic (GUL MS Hunter 509, ff. 1r-167v): A
compen-dium of mediaeval medicine including the Middle English Gilbertus Anglicus. Bern:
Peter Lang.
Esteban-Segura, Laura. 2012b. The Middle English Gilbertus Anglicus: An assessment of dialec-tal features in G.U.L. MS Hunter 307 (ff. 13r-145v). In Sara Martín Alegre & Melissa Moyer & Elisabet Pladevall & Susagna Tubau (eds.), At a time of crisis: English and
American studies in Spain, 323-328. Barcelona: Departament de Filologia Anglesa i
de Germanística, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona/AEDEAN.
Esteban-Segura, Laura. 2013. Some notes on London, Wellcome Library, MS 5262. In Rosario Arias et al. (eds.), Hopes and fears: English and American studies in Spain.
Proceed-ings of the 36th AEDEAN Conference, 215-220. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga.
Jones, Claire. 2000. Vernacular literacy in late-medieval England: The example of East Anglian
medical manuscripts. Ph.D. thesis, University of Glasgow. Available at
http://theses.gla.ac.uk/633/ (Last accessed 15 March, 2013).
Laing, Margaret. 1989a. Introduction. In Margaret Laing (ed.), Middle English dialectology: Essays
on some principles and problems, ix-xiv. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.
Laing, Margaret. 1989b. Dialectal analysis and linguistically composite texts in Middle English. In Margaret Laing (ed.), Middle English dialectology: Essays on some principles and
problems, 150-169. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.
Laing, Margaret & Keith Williamson (eds.). 1994. Speaking in our tongues: Medieval
dialectolo-gy and related disciplines. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.
Lass, Roger. 2004. Ut custodiant litteras: Editions, corpora and witnesshood. In Marina Dossena & Roger Lass (eds.), Methods and data in English historical dialectology, 21-48. Bern: Peter Lang.
Mäkinen, Martti. 2004. Herbal recipes and recipes in herbals – intertextuality in early English medical writing. In Irma Taavitsainen & Päivi Pahta (eds.), Medical and scientific
writing in late medieval English, 144-173. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Marqués-Aguado, Teresa. 2009. The dialectal provenance of G.U.L. MS Hunter 513. In Javier E. Díaz Vera & Rosario Caballero (eds.), Textual healing: Studies in medieval English
medical, scientific and technical texts, 109-121. Bern: Peter Lang.
McIntosh, Angus & Michael L. Samuels & Michael Benskin. 1986. A linguistic atlas of Late
Mediaeval English. 4 vols. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.
Miranda-García, Antonio & Joaquín Garrido-Garrido. 2012. Text Search Engine (TexSEn). Málaga: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Málaga.
Mossé, Fernand. 1952. A handbook of Middle English. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins Press.
Ogden, Margaret Sinclair (ed.). 1938. The ‘Liber de diversis medicinis’ in the Thornton
manu-script (MS. Lincoln Cathedral A.5.2.). Early English Text Society O.S. 207. London:
Oxford University Press.
Riddy, Felicity (ed.). 1991. Regionalism in late medieval manuscripts and texts: Essays
celebrat-ing the publication of A lcelebrat-inguistic atlas of late mediaeval English. Cambridge: D. S.
Brewer.
Stenroos, Merja. 2004. Regional dialects and spelling conventions in late Middle English: Searches for (th) in the LALME data. In Marina Dossena & Roger Lass (eds.),
Me-thods and data in English historical dialectology, 257-285. Bern: Peter Lang.
Voigts, Linda E. & Michael R. McVaugh. 1984. A Latin technical phlebotomy and its Middle English translation. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 74/2: 1-6.
